MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986722770 · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/750/2/l29

MAGNETIC FIELD IN THE ISOLATED MASSIVE DENSE CLUMP IRAS 20126+4104

2012· article· en· W1986722770 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetic fieldRotation (mathematics)Field (mathematics)StarsStar formationBipolar outflowStar (game theory)Outflow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We measured polarized dust emission at 350 μm toward the high-mass star-forming massive dense clump IRAS 20126+4104 using the SHARC II Polarimeter, SHARP, at the Caltech Submillimeter Observatory. Most of the observed magnetic field vectors agree well with magnetic field vectors obtained from a numerical simulation for the case when the global magnetic field lines are inclined with respect to the rotation axis of the dense clump. The results of the numerical simulation show that rotation plays an important role on the evolution of the massive dense clump and its magnetic field. The direction of the cold CO 1–0 bipolar outflow is parallel to the observed magnetic field within the dense clump as well as the global magnetic field, as inferred from optical polarimetry data, indicating that the magnetic field also plays a critical role in an early stage of massive star formation. The large-scale Keplerian disk of the massive (proto)star rotates in an almost opposite sense to the clump's envelope. The observed magnetic field morphology and the counterrotating feature of the massive dense clump system provide hints to constrain the role of magnetic fields in the process of high-mass star formation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207